From: s1018954@aix2.uottawa.ca
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: ddcd0038b6652eedda459d75a24bf809201aa879368c9c25476fa2429f5becfb
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9510181440.A93842-0100000@aix2.uottawa.ca>
Reply To: <Pine.3.89.9510181314.C103772-0100000@aix2>
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-18 18:11:00 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 11:11:00 PDT
From: s1018954@aix2.uottawa.ca
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 11:11:00 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9510181314.C103772-0100000@aix2>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9510181440.A93842-0100000@aix2.uottawa.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Wed, 18 Oct 1995 I wrote:
> It seems to me that receiving messages through newsgroups (sent through
> remailernet) and having them retrieved automatically by your newsreader
> might be a better method of defeating traffic analysis. Sounds like Vinge's
Nah. I'll take it back. Send encrypted through usenet, receive
encrypted through usenet. Best of both, but very slow and only good for
voluntary mail reception. You could also have an agent doing this
scanning for msgs and posting unencrypted (or send mail to an
unwitting spam victim). While it protects all but the last mailer almost
completely, it's far slower than remailernet and only protects against
traffic analysis.
Return to October 1995
Return to “Thomas Grant Edwards <tedwards@Glue.umd.edu>”